Kohn v. Hornung
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 269, Oct. T., 1911, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., June T., 1911, No. 4,683, making absolute rule for judgment for want of' sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Charles Kohn v. Jacob Hornung, Jr. Assumpsit on promissory notes. The opinion of the Superior Court states the facts. Error assigned was order making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bt
Henderson, J.,
The plaintiff’s action was brought to recover the amount of three promissory notes for $100 each given by the defendant to the Empire Distillery Company to apply on the purchase of thirty barrels of whisky. The transaction was between an agent of the distillery company and the defendant. The whisky was in a bonded warehouse and was not seen by the defendant. The supplemental affidavit of defense sets forth that a sample of the whisky was exhibited by the agent of the distillery company at the time of the contract of sale. Only three barrels of the whisky were delivered…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bacon v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Moeck v. LittellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- Martz v. W. H. Wilcox Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Pierce v. Bank of North America & Trust Co.Pennylvania Municipal Court, Philadelphia County · 1923